Does Vaulting solve the problem of all types of dilution?
Comments
-
No
My poll is intentionally vague. This will allow everyone to voice their interpretation of the dilution issue (if they have it) or voice their opinion on if Vaulting fixed the issue, or if they didn't believe there was an issue to begin with. I am not trying to lead anyone in a particular direction with the poll. Yes or no is simple. Add your reasoning in your post.veny said:Turning servers off also solve dilution problem - your poll is vague and its result may lead to horrific interpretations.
My answer will be more complex - Vaulting decreased the amount of 4*s actually available, which increased the chance of picking one specific cover, but this came with huge (for me unacceptable) cost - non-vaulted 4*s are de facto unavailable (yeah, basically they are gone, impossible to be farmed, rr upgraded up to point useful in fight and DDQ titan node)
I feel that if I try to lead people in any direction by offering more than "yes" and "no" I'm doing a disservice to the merit of the poll, which is simply "is this working?". That is what the comments section is for.
As usual, in the comments, people are doing whatever they can to spin the issue to fit their opinion. Is anyone ever going to convince a "certain poster" that Vaulting is not good for everyone or even a majority by their comments? Ha! NO!
Vaulting is losing this poll. Point blank.di·lu·tiondīˈlo͞oSHn,diˈlo͞oSH(ə)n/nounthe action of making a liquid more dilute.the action of making something weaker in force, content, or value."he is resisting any dilution of dogma"a liquid that has been diluted.plural noun: dilutions
I don't care that a quote from the MPQ team cherry picked pack dilution as their definition of dilution. That doesn't cover all dilution. Roster strength dilution is also affected by these systems.
There have been plenty of suggestions that offer good alternatives to both pack AND roster dilution. Those have not (yet) been implemented.
So we continue to debate this and hopefully catch the eye or ear of someone in power that says to themselves, "Wait, only making half of our customer base happy is not good. Go team, and find a solution that gets us to 80% or better"!
And that's my stance. I tried the suggested way. Not hoarding, opening tokens as they came, etc... All Vaulting did for me was drain my ISO for a few characters that I covered while at the same time WASTING a bunch of CP for powers I already had 5 in with characters that weren't up to 13 covers. CP are hard to come by, compared to every other resource. I don't particularly like a system that wastes those while not strengthening my roster. I can only level characters up so much until I have to get the needed covers for them. And once they leave the 12, that 15/1/1 is still just a 5/1/1 to probably never be covered.
That is "working as intended?" Well, I hope not!
So let's have a simple poll to show them that people feel it is or it isn't..and if they want to draw more than a simple conclusion, they can read the comments.
In the end, the power lies with MPQ to interpret the results to their choosing. Just like we all interpret this poll and the very definition of dilution to our choosing.
You can all be assured they will make the best decision for them. Hopefully, that decision makes more than 50% of the player base happy as well.
1 -
Yes
So you don't care about what dilution actually means as it relates to the discussion at hand, because you decided to make it about something completely different. Sure. Changing the subject entirely isn't exactly how debating works, but however you want to go about your business.Beer40 said:
My poll is intentionally vague. This will allow everyone to voice their interpretation of the dilution issue (if they have it) or voice their opinion on if Vaulting fixed the issue, or if they didn't believe there was an issue to begin with. I am not trying to lead anyone in a particular direction with the poll. Yes or no is simple. Add your reasoning in your post.veny said:Turning servers off also solve dilution problem - your poll is vague and its result may lead to horrific interpretations.
My answer will be more complex - Vaulting decreased the amount of 4*s actually available, which increased the chance of picking one specific cover, but this came with huge (for me unacceptable) cost - non-vaulted 4*s are de facto unavailable (yeah, basically they are gone, impossible to be farmed, rr upgraded up to point useful in fight and DDQ titan node)
I feel that if I try to lead people in any direction by offering more than "yes" and "no" I'm doing a disservice to the merit of the poll, which is simply "is this working?". That is what the comments section is for.
As usual, in the comments, people are doing whatever they can to spin the issue to fit their opinion. Is anyone ever going to convince a "certain poster" that Vaulting is not good for everyone or even a majority by their comments? Ha! NO!
Vaulting is losing this poll. Point blank.di·lu·tiondīˈlo͞oSHn,diˈlo͞oSH(ə)n/nounthe action of making a liquid more dilute.the action of making something weaker in force, content, or value."he is resisting any dilution of dogma"a liquid that has been diluted.plural noun: dilutions
I don't care that a quote from the MPQ team cherry picked pack dilution as their definition of dilution. That doesn't cover all dilution. Roster strength dilution is also affected by these systems.
There have been plenty of suggestions that offer good alternatives to both pack AND roster dilution. Those have not (yet) been implemented.
So we continue to debate this and hopefully catch the eye or ear of someone in power that says to themselves, "Wait, only making half of our customer base happy is not good. Go team, and find a solution that gets us to 80% or better"!
And that's my stance. I tried the suggested way. Not hoarding, opening tokens as they came, etc... All Vaulting did for me was drain my ISO for a few characters that I covered while at the same time WASTING a bunch of CP for powers I already had 5 in with characters that weren't up to 13 covers. CP are hard to come by, compared to every other resource. I don't particularly like a system that wastes those while not strengthening my roster. I can only level characters up so much until I have to get the needed covers for them. And once they leave the 12, that 15/1/1 is still just a 5/1/1 to probably never be covered.
That is "working as intended?" Well, I hope not!
So let's have a simple poll to show them that people feel it is or it isn't..and if they want to draw more than a simple conclusion, they can read the comments.
In the end, the power lies with MPQ to interpret the results to their choosing. Just like we all interpret this poll and the very definition of dilution to our choosing.
You can all be assured they will make the best decision for them. Hopefully, that decision makes more than 50% of the player base happy as well.
If CP are that precious to you, and you absolutely don't want to waste them, then spend them for covers at 120 a pop. Guaranteed no waste. Otherwise, like the rest of us, the shortcomings of the RNG-based LT economy will play out however they desire.3 -
Yes
I can't believe you still aren't getting this.Beer40 said:
My poll is intentionally vague. This will allow everyone to voice their interpretation of the dilution issue (if they have it) or voice their opinion on if Vaulting fixed the issue, or if they didn't believe there was an issue to begin with. I am not trying to lead anyone in a particular direction with the poll. Yes or no is simple. Add your reasoning in your post.veny said:Turning servers off also solve dilution problem - your poll is vague and its result may lead to horrific interpretations.
My answer will be more complex - Vaulting decreased the amount of 4*s actually available, which increased the chance of picking one specific cover, but this came with huge (for me unacceptable) cost - non-vaulted 4*s are de facto unavailable (yeah, basically they are gone, impossible to be farmed, rr upgraded up to point useful in fight and DDQ titan node)
I feel that if I try to lead people in any direction by offering more than "yes" and "no" I'm doing a disservice to the merit of the poll, which is simply "is this working?". That is what the comments section is for.
As usual, in the comments, people are doing whatever they can to spin the issue to fit their opinion. Is anyone ever going to convince a "certain poster" that Vaulting is not good for everyone or even a majority by their comments? Ha! NO!
Vaulting is losing this poll. Point blank.di·lu·tiondīˈlo͞oSHn,diˈlo͞oSH(ə)n/nounthe action of making a liquid more dilute.the action of making something weaker in force, content, or value."he is resisting any dilution of dogma"a liquid that has been diluted.plural noun: dilutions
I don't care that a quote from the MPQ team cherry picked pack dilution as their definition of dilution. That doesn't cover all dilution. Roster strength dilution is also affected by these systems.
There have been plenty of suggestions that offer good alternatives to both pack AND roster dilution. Those have not (yet) been implemented.
So we continue to debate this and hopefully catch the eye or ear of someone in power that says to themselves, "Wait, only making half of our customer base happy is not good. Go team, and find a solution that gets us to 80% or better"!
And that's my stance. I tried the suggested way. Not hoarding, opening tokens as they came, etc... All Vaulting did for me was drain my ISO for a few characters that I covered while at the same time WASTING a bunch of CP for powers I already had 5 in with characters that weren't up to 13 covers. CP are hard to come by, compared to every other resource. I don't particularly like a system that wastes those while not strengthening my roster. I can only level characters up so much until I have to get the needed covers for them. And once they leave the 12, that 15/1/1 is still just a 5/1/1 to probably never be covered.
That is "working as intended?" Well, I hope not!
So let's have a simple poll to show them that people feel it is or it isn't..and if they want to draw more than a simple conclusion, they can read the comments.
In the end, the power lies with MPQ to interpret the results to their choosing. Just like we all interpret this poll and the very definition of dilution to our choosing.
You can all be assured they will make the best decision for them. Hopefully, that decision makes more than 50% of the player base happy as well.
Dilution is the action of diluting something....di·lutedīˈlo͞ot,dəˈlo͞ot/verbverb: dilute; 3rd person present: dilutes; past tense: diluted; past participle: diluted; gerund or present participle: diluting- 1.make (a liquid) thinner or weaker by adding water or another solvent to it."bleach can be diluted with cold water"
synonyms: make weaker, weaken, water down; More
You keep leaving out the key qualifier of "by adding other elements to it"
That is what dilution means. There is no such thing as "roster strength dilution" and even if there is it would only be improved by vaulting which concentrates your roster with newer characters.
Lastly your issue with 15/1/1 characters has absolutely nothing to do with vaulting. Again, this is something that vaulting actually helps with as you are FAR more likely to pull a 3rd cover for a 5/5/2 in the 2 week window before a 6th or more cover in the other colors expires compared to the old system.
Reason is what it losing in this poll "point blank," not vaulting.
1 -
NoNo it's a bandaid because it has no rotation aspect. It's an attempt at a solution but its far from sufficient yet.
Without hoarding or acquiring tokens at a rate of someone at the 4 or 5 star level you will still not cover characters fast enough before they leave tokens.
It doesn't at all help that they didn't "reset the clock" and give us the full cycle to go for peggy wasp jessica moon knight kate etc. AKA half of the characters.
It would be a solution if for example every season I personally choose which 12 of the 4's to to focus on maybe once per season.
That way I could at the very minimum actually work towards a character regardless of artificial limits placed while facing bearable rates in tokens.0 -
Yes
You might feel that way if the reason your shoes didn't fit was because you grew a new toe every 2 weeks.Stax the Foyer said:Sure, it solves it, in the same way that cutting off a toe solves the problem of outgrowing a pair of shoes.1 -
Yes
You might say that having all the new characters rotate in while the old characters rotate out could be considered a rotation aspect.GurlBYE said:No it's a bandaid because it has no rotation aspect. It's an attempt at a solution but its far from sufficient yet.
Without hoarding or acquiring tokens at a rate of someone at the 4 or 5 star level you will still not cover characters fast enough before they leave tokens.
It doesn't at all help that they didn't "reset the clock" and give us the full cycle to go for peggy wasp jessica moon knight kate etc. AKA half of the characters.
It would be a solution if for example every season I personally choose which 12 of the 4's to to focus on maybe once per season.
That way I could at the very minimum actually work towards a character regardless of artificial limits placed while facing bearable rates in tokens.
You don't need to play at the 4 or 5* level to earn covers fast enough before they leave tokens. We've done the math on this and you need a 4* every other day to keep up. An active daily 3* player transitioning should be able to manage this.
Allowing you to pick and choose what covers are available would break the game. Everyone would pick the top 12 4s and the meta would stagnate, people would also spend less. That's not a viable solution.
Allowing older characters to rotate in arbitrarily just adds more dilution and doesn't really solve the problem well either. What would be really great is if they implemented some method for players to target just one or two of the older characters to finish up, but keep them all out of the pool or "rotation." That way you can still work on older characters without having them dilute the token pool every time they rotate. They could call them "bonus heroes" or something like that.....you should make a thread in the suggestions forum with this idea.0 -
Yes
Since half the posts seem to be about semantics:Pylgrim said:
Then you don't understand the term "dilution". Dilution doesn't mean waste or avoiding it. Dilution is having 46 4*s with 1-4 covers and taking years to reach 13 in one or more. Under that light, vaulting DID solve dilution.Beer40 said:It hasn't helped me at all. I was just starting in the 4* transition so I didn't have much waste at all. Now I have enough (plus lack of ISO) that I had to stop pulling and start hoarding.
Dilution isn't a problem and has never been one, no matter how often some people who don't understand the meaning of the word problem repeat it.
People not getting usable 4* within a reasonable timeframe is a problem.
Dilution and the amount of available 4* covers are among the causes of the problem.
People not getting 75% of 4* to a usable level within even an unreasonable timeframe is a new problem. (So is people no longer getting champ levels for vaulted characters.)
Vaulting is the main cause of those two problems.
2 -
Yes
You see 5 problems? Eloquently describe please. I see:jredd said:technically it does. but it creates 5 different problems in the process. needs to be changed. sooner the better.
(Newer player problems)
1. Difficult to get required character before a given PVE. (Old system and 1% chance of top ten made this unlikely before)
2. Difficult to build a usable base of older characters. (This was always a matter of time. A long, long time)
3. Difficult to get a specific character for Crash of Titans/Behemoth Burrito. (Time to build a useable Crash character, but if you can spare HP, Heroes for Hire can get the one cover you need. Otherwise, you would already need to have had it)
4. Cannot evenly build a roster via store purchases. (Legit concern for a newer player. They'll get strong, new characters, but will be stuck with a few old characters with only a couple covers.)
5. Uneven experience with boosted characters. (Even older players will get hit with this. I've had fantastic weeks with 4 out of 5 boosted Legendary at Champ levels, or this week with only 1 of them. Bright side is, Developers seem to be making an effort to make sure someone from the latest 12 is boosted. Still, sure to make a new player sad when Iceman, Red Hulk, Teen Jean, etc are boosted and they don't get to rampage through events with the massive AOE thet provide)
New players are always going to suffer from not having played the game for years. They will not be able to catch up, unless they put money into buying HP, but HP won't help with Legendaries.
(Older player problems)
6. Can't effectively build Champion levels on old characters. (Nope, you can't. You can, however, build relatively evenly by selecting lower level Legendary/Rare characters as favorites, then selecting a new one when they catch up to your stronger ones. While this doesn't do much for PVP, this is a major advantage to PVE since you can slow your PVE scaling down to reduce the disadvantage your new/incomplete required characters face.)
7. New characters face a disadvantage based on your current scaling. (New characters are worthless at first, but they've always been worthless at first)
Older and more experienced players with larger and more developed rosters are at an advantage. Simple fact. A Vintage Legendary store could help newer players build what older players spent the last couple of years working on, but then it's a choice between using resources to build old characters, or using resources to build new characters. I'd still call the current system better than randomly getting 1 out of 50 characters with a high chance of not getting what you need, if you need something specific.0 -
No
https://www.google.com/search?q=dilution+definition&oq=dilu&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i60j69i57j0l3.1918j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8Fightmastermpq said:
I can't believe you still aren't getting this.Beer40 said:
My poll is intentionally vague. This will allow everyone to voice their interpretation of the dilution issue (if they have it) or voice their opinion on if Vaulting fixed the issue, or if they didn't believe there was an issue to begin with. I am not trying to lead anyone in a particular direction with the poll. Yes or no is simple. Add your reasoning in your post.veny said:Turning servers off also solve dilution problem - your poll is vague and its result may lead to horrific interpretations.
My answer will be more complex - Vaulting decreased the amount of 4*s actually available, which increased the chance of picking one specific cover, but this came with huge (for me unacceptable) cost - non-vaulted 4*s are de facto unavailable (yeah, basically they are gone, impossible to be farmed, rr upgraded up to point useful in fight and DDQ titan node)
I feel that if I try to lead people in any direction by offering more than "yes" and "no" I'm doing a disservice to the merit of the poll, which is simply "is this working?". That is what the comments section is for.
As usual, in the comments, people are doing whatever they can to spin the issue to fit their opinion. Is anyone ever going to convince a "certain poster" that Vaulting is not good for everyone or even a majority by their comments? Ha! NO!
Vaulting is losing this poll. Point blank.di·lu·tiondīˈlo͞oSHn,diˈlo͞oSH(ə)n/nounthe action of making a liquid more dilute.the action of making something weaker in force, content, or value."he is resisting any dilution of dogma"a liquid that has been diluted.plural noun: dilutions
I don't care that a quote from the MPQ team cherry picked pack dilution as their definition of dilution. That doesn't cover all dilution. Roster strength dilution is also affected by these systems.
There have been plenty of suggestions that offer good alternatives to both pack AND roster dilution. Those have not (yet) been implemented.
So we continue to debate this and hopefully catch the eye or ear of someone in power that says to themselves, "Wait, only making half of our customer base happy is not good. Go team, and find a solution that gets us to 80% or better"!
And that's my stance. I tried the suggested way. Not hoarding, opening tokens as they came, etc... All Vaulting did for me was drain my ISO for a few characters that I covered while at the same time WASTING a bunch of CP for powers I already had 5 in with characters that weren't up to 13 covers. CP are hard to come by, compared to every other resource. I don't particularly like a system that wastes those while not strengthening my roster. I can only level characters up so much until I have to get the needed covers for them. And once they leave the 12, that 15/1/1 is still just a 5/1/1 to probably never be covered.
That is "working as intended?" Well, I hope not!
So let's have a simple poll to show them that people feel it is or it isn't..and if they want to draw more than a simple conclusion, they can read the comments.
In the end, the power lies with MPQ to interpret the results to their choosing. Just like we all interpret this poll and the very definition of dilution to our choosing.
You can all be assured they will make the best decision for them. Hopefully, that decision makes more than 50% of the player base happy as well.
Dilution is the action of diluting something....di·lutedīˈlo͞ot,dəˈlo͞ot/verbverb: dilute; 3rd person present: dilutes; past tense: diluted; past participle: diluted; gerund or present participle: diluting- 1.make (a liquid) thinner or weaker by adding water or another solvent to it."bleach can be diluted with cold water"
synonyms: make weaker, weaken, water down; More
You keep leaving out the key qualifier of "by adding other elements to it"
That is what dilution means. There is no such thing as "roster strength dilution" and even if there is it would only be improved by vaulting which concentrates your roster with newer characters.
Lastly your issue with 15/1/1 characters has absolutely nothing to do with vaulting. Again, this is something that vaulting actually helps with as you are FAR more likely to pull a 3rd cover for a 5/5/2 in the 2 week window before a 6th or more cover in the other colors expires compared to the old system.
Reason is what it losing in this poll "point blank," not vaulting.
There's the source of my definition. What is yours?
There is a huge difference between a 15/1/1 and a 5/5/2. That's apples to oranges. So you're cherry picking again.
Also, for your example, you are not "FAR" more likely to pull the exact cover you need in that 2 week window. You're slightly more likely, and that is completely dependent on:
1) Having enough CP to make enough pulls to get that exact cover. Most people don't make a bunch of CP in 2 weeks. With your higher level roster, you are again completely missing the point that you are in a minority.
2) Getting the exact cover in a completely luck based system.
We can have someone run the math to show exactly how close/far away from "FAR more likely" we are. I don't have a problem with that.
You being out of touch with what a majority of players experience is why you refuse to accept another point of view. I don't mean that as rude or harsh, its just where you are at in the progression of the game.
We're all dependent on each other to keep a game long running. Games need players. When a "solution" is only accepted by 42% of the players (current Forum results) then eventually your working system is going to run out of players sooner or later...and then whether it works for you or not will be irrelevant.
I'll just be blunt about it so you get the point: No one wants to ruin your playing experience. I'm glad Vaulting has had a positive effect on many players. Clearly, it has a negative effect on many also. I'd like a system that is positive for more people.0 -
Yes
Google. Just google dilute. Make an effort.Beer40 said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=dilution+definition&oq=dilu&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i60j69i57j0l3.1918j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8Fightmastermpq said:
I can't believe you still aren't getting this.Beer40 said:
My poll is intentionally vague. This will allow everyone to voice their interpretation of the dilution issue (if they have it) or voice their opinion on if Vaulting fixed the issue, or if they didn't believe there was an issue to begin with. I am not trying to lead anyone in a particular direction with the poll. Yes or no is simple. Add your reasoning in your post.veny said:Turning servers off also solve dilution problem - your poll is vague and its result may lead to horrific interpretations.
My answer will be more complex - Vaulting decreased the amount of 4*s actually available, which increased the chance of picking one specific cover, but this came with huge (for me unacceptable) cost - non-vaulted 4*s are de facto unavailable (yeah, basically they are gone, impossible to be farmed, rr upgraded up to point useful in fight and DDQ titan node)
I feel that if I try to lead people in any direction by offering more than "yes" and "no" I'm doing a disservice to the merit of the poll, which is simply "is this working?". That is what the comments section is for.
As usual, in the comments, people are doing whatever they can to spin the issue to fit their opinion. Is anyone ever going to convince a "certain poster" that Vaulting is not good for everyone or even a majority by their comments? Ha! NO!
Vaulting is losing this poll. Point blank.di·lu·tiondīˈlo͞oSHn,diˈlo͞oSH(ə)n/nounthe action of making a liquid more dilute.the action of making something weaker in force, content, or value."he is resisting any dilution of dogma"a liquid that has been diluted.plural noun: dilutions
I don't care that a quote from the MPQ team cherry picked pack dilution as their definition of dilution. That doesn't cover all dilution. Roster strength dilution is also affected by these systems.
There have been plenty of suggestions that offer good alternatives to both pack AND roster dilution. Those have not (yet) been implemented.
So we continue to debate this and hopefully catch the eye or ear of someone in power that says to themselves, "Wait, only making half of our customer base happy is not good. Go team, and find a solution that gets us to 80% or better"!
And that's my stance. I tried the suggested way. Not hoarding, opening tokens as they came, etc... All Vaulting did for me was drain my ISO for a few characters that I covered while at the same time WASTING a bunch of CP for powers I already had 5 in with characters that weren't up to 13 covers. CP are hard to come by, compared to every other resource. I don't particularly like a system that wastes those while not strengthening my roster. I can only level characters up so much until I have to get the needed covers for them. And once they leave the 12, that 15/1/1 is still just a 5/1/1 to probably never be covered.
That is "working as intended?" Well, I hope not!
So let's have a simple poll to show them that people feel it is or it isn't..and if they want to draw more than a simple conclusion, they can read the comments.
In the end, the power lies with MPQ to interpret the results to their choosing. Just like we all interpret this poll and the very definition of dilution to our choosing.
You can all be assured they will make the best decision for them. Hopefully, that decision makes more than 50% of the player base happy as well.
Dilution is the action of diluting something....di·lutedīˈlo͞ot,dəˈlo͞ot/verbverb: dilute; 3rd person present: dilutes; past tense: diluted; past participle: diluted; gerund or present participle: diluting- 1.make (a liquid) thinner or weaker by adding water or another solvent to it."bleach can be diluted with cold water"
synonyms: make weaker, weaken, water down; More
You keep leaving out the key qualifier of "by adding other elements to it"
That is what dilution means. There is no such thing as "roster strength dilution" and even if there is it would only be improved by vaulting which concentrates your roster with newer characters.
Lastly your issue with 15/1/1 characters has absolutely nothing to do with vaulting. Again, this is something that vaulting actually helps with as you are FAR more likely to pull a 3rd cover for a 5/5/2 in the 2 week window before a 6th or more cover in the other colors expires compared to the old system.
Reason is what it losing in this poll "point blank," not vaulting.
There's the source of my definition. What is yours?
There is a huge difference between a 15/1/1 and a 5/5/2. That's apples to oranges. So you're cherry picking again.
Also, for your example, you are not "FAR" more likely to pull the exact cover you need in that 2 week window. You're slightly more likely, and that is completely dependent on:
1) Having enough CP to make enough pulls to get that exact cover. Most people don't make a bunch of CP in 2 weeks. With your higher level roster, you are again completely missing the point that you are in a minority.
2) Getting the exact cover in a completely luck based system.
We can have someone run the math to show exactly how close/far away from "FAR more likely" we are. I don't have a problem with that.
You being out of touch with what a majority of players experience is why you refuse to accept another point of view. I don't mean that as rude or harsh, its just where you are at in the progression of the game.
We're all dependent on each other to keep a game long running. Games need players. When a "solution" is only accepted by 42% of the players (current Forum results) then eventually your working system is going to run out of players sooner or later...and then whether it works for you or not will be irrelevant.
I'll just be blunt about it so you get the point: No one wants to ruin your playing experience. I'm glad Vaulting has had a positive effect on many players. Clearly, it has a negative effect on many also. I'd like a system that is positive for more people.
15/1/1, 5/5/2 it doesn't matter. Your complaint is with RNG. Every time you pull a cover RNG determines what color it is. Vaulting won't change that your first 17 covers for a characters land 15/1/1 or a nice usable 6/6/5. What vaulting does do is reduce the number of pulls required to get a character to 13 usable covers.
The math is simple. It's 4. There are 48 4*s (or very close to that) and all but 12 are vaulted. So under the old system your odds of pulling a cover for that character were 1/48, now they are 1/12. That's 4 times better. 4. Make an effort.
I'm not refusing to accept another point of view. I'm refusing to accept your defintion of dilution as it pertains to this issue because it's WRONG. What does it matter if 58% of players don't like vaulting when you have perfectly illustrated why you and others who think like you simply don't understand what dilution even is? Of course you don't like the solution, you can't even define the problem.1 -
Yes
If you don't understand how a 1/12 chance for a specific character from each pull is FAR better than a 1/50 (soon to be 51!) chance on each pull, I don't know how much an explanation of the math will benefit this discussion.Beer40 said:
Also, for your example, you are not "FAR" more likely to pull the exact cover you need in that 2 week window. You're slightly more likely, and that is completely dependent on:
1) Having enough CP to make enough pulls to get that exact cover. Most people don't make a bunch of CP in 2 weeks. With your higher level roster, you are again completely missing the point that you are in a minority.
2) Getting the exact cover in a completely luck based system.4 -
No
I'll put it this way, drawing one per day.Fightmastermpq said:
You might say that having all the new characters rotate in while the old characters rotate out could be considered a rotation aspect.GurlBYE said:No it's a bandaid because it has no rotation aspect. It's an attempt at a solution but its far from sufficient yet.
Without hoarding or acquiring tokens at a rate of someone at the 4 or 5 star level you will still not cover characters fast enough before they leave tokens.
It doesn't at all help that they didn't "reset the clock" and give us the full cycle to go for peggy wasp jessica moon knight kate etc. AKA half of the characters.
It would be a solution if for example every season I personally choose which 12 of the 4's to to focus on maybe once per season.
That way I could at the very minimum actually work towards a character regardless of artificial limits placed while facing bearable rates in tokens.
You don't need to play at the 4 or 5* level to earn covers fast enough before they leave tokens. We've done the math on this and you need a 4* every other day to keep up. An active daily 3* player transitioning should be able to manage this.
Allowing you to pick and choose what covers are available would break the game. Everyone would pick the top 12 4s and the meta would stagnate, people would also spend less. That's not a viable solution.
Allowing older characters to rotate in arbitrarily just adds more dilution and doesn't really solve the problem well either. What would be really great is if they implemented some method for players to target just one or two of the older characters to finish up, but keep them all out of the pool or "rotation." That way you can still work on older characters without having them dilute the token pool every time they rotate. They could call them "bonus heroes" or something like that.....you should make a thread in the suggestions forum with this idea.
The math hasn't worked for me. Neither has bonus heros. And 1 draw a day is pretty decent all things considered. (somedays .5 some days 2+ so it averages out)
And the most important factor is.
This didn't fix dilution.
It just got rid of 75% and growing of 1 tier
and 50% and growing of the other.
If you solution to dilution is getting rid of the mixture, is it a solution or just creating a new mixture without facing or acknowledging the problem, that is still getting worse and more insurmountable. 2 more characters get added into the forbidden pile, and all of the people that don't have them fully covered kinda just have to deal.
Making the champing rewards system worse in the process.
And no choosing your own characters wouldn't break the game. Or we wouldn't have bonus heros, as piddly as the rates are.
The top 12 has changed more times in the past 6 months than it has in the history of the game lol.
It'd make achievable goals. And also give people who keep choosing the same characters really really lopsided rosters.
It's hard to break the game with people ranging from using level 167 3 stars competing against people who already have 300 4 stars and 5 stars at 350 in the same bracket.
I understand you have your mind firmly in one place. but why even bother responding with sarcasm, or going against every single person who feels their needs aren't met because your math says they should be happy?
0 -
Yes
Because math doesn't lie. You can have your opinion and we can discuss it, but your opinion has to be based on valid math. When you try to claim that vaulting sucks because you can't get enough covers to champ someone in 36 WEEKS then your opinion is based on bad math and is invalid.GurlBYE said:Fightmastermpq said:
You might say that having all the new characters rotate in while the old characters rotate out could be considered a rotation aspect.GurlBYE said:No it's a bandaid because it has no rotation aspect. It's an attempt at a solution but its far from sufficient yet.
Without hoarding or acquiring tokens at a rate of someone at the 4 or 5 star level you will still not cover characters fast enough before they leave tokens.
It doesn't at all help that they didn't "reset the clock" and give us the full cycle to go for peggy wasp jessica moon knight kate etc. AKA half of the characters.
It would be a solution if for example every season I personally choose which 12 of the 4's to to focus on maybe once per season.
That way I could at the very minimum actually work towards a character regardless of artificial limits placed while facing bearable rates in tokens.
You don't need to play at the 4 or 5* level to earn covers fast enough before they leave tokens. We've done the math on this and you need a 4* every other day to keep up. An active daily 3* player transitioning should be able to manage this.
Allowing you to pick and choose what covers are available would break the game. Everyone would pick the top 12 4s and the meta would stagnate, people would also spend less. That's not a viable solution.
Allowing older characters to rotate in arbitrarily just adds more dilution and doesn't really solve the problem well either. What would be really great is if they implemented some method for players to target just one or two of the older characters to finish up, but keep them all out of the pool or "rotation." That way you can still work on older characters without having them dilute the token pool every time they rotate. They could call them "bonus heroes" or something like that.....you should make a thread in the suggestions forum with this idea.
I understand you have your mind firmly in one place. but why even bother responding with sarcasm, or going against every single person who feels their needs aren't met because your math says they should be happy?1 -
Yes
Indeed. 1/12 is more than 4 times better than 1/50.New McG said:
If you don't understand how a 1/12 chance for a specific character from each pull is FAR better than a 1/50 (soon to be 51!) chance on each pull, I don't know how much an explanation of the math will benefit this discussion.Beer40 said:
Also, for your example, you are not "FAR" more likely to pull the exact cover you need in that 2 week window. You're slightly more likely, and that is completely dependent on:
1) Having enough CP to make enough pulls to get that exact cover. Most people don't make a bunch of CP in 2 weeks. With your higher level roster, you are again completely missing the point that you are in a minority.
2) Getting the exact cover in a completely luck based system.
But 1/50 is far more than 4 times better than 0/38. Maybe that's what people don't like.
1 -
I want to respond to this specifically, sorry for jumping in so late.Beer40 said:
We're all dependent on each other to keep a game long running. Games need players. When a "solution" is only accepted by 42% of the players (current Forum results) then eventually your working system is going to run out of players sooner or later...and then whether it works for you or not will be irrelevant.
I'll just be blunt about it so you get the point: No one wants to ruin your playing experience. I'm glad Vaulting has had a positive effect on many players. Clearly, it has a negative effect on many also. I'd like a system that is positive for more people.
I (and Fightmaster and many others it seems) just don't believe this is true. It is all just a perception issue. These people are upset because their roster plans got ruined or one of their favorite characters got vaulted and they react emotionally to those changes. People saying it has had a negative effect on them maybe haven't really given it a try (still hoarding tokens/cp!) or I've even seen some say they refuse to open tokens right now. Or maybe it just hasn't been in effect long enough for them to see how it will really benefit them in the long run (if they aren't opening as many tokens as others). People were so emotionally invested in the old system that it just won't be possible to convince them they aren't thinking about the new one the right way. It's why you've seen me much less in these "debates", it can be amusing for a while, but ultimately it's frustrating when people refuse to even open their mind about it.
tl;dr - No one can prove that their roster is negatively effected by the change (cause it probably isn't), they just FEEL like they are due to various psychological complications.3 -
Yes
I apologise if I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't trying to imply that your problems are not real or that they do not need tending. But your problem is NOT dilution and vaulting DID address dilution. As an analogy you are thirsty and the devs provided food but not drink. You are still thirsty and understandably feel vexed that you were provided food when you needed water (some people did need food) and in fact, it could be argued that the salt in the food made you thirstier. But then you went and made a poll asking if the food provided had the capacity to sate hunger. The answer is yes, regardless of how it addressed your particular need or not.Beer40 said:
My poll is intentionally vague. This will allow everyone to voice their interpretation of the dilution issue (if they have it) or voice their opinion on if Vaulting fixed the issue, or if they didn't believe there was an issue to begin with. I am not trying to lead anyone in a particular direction with the poll. Yes or no is simple. Add your reasoning in your post.veny said:Turning servers off also solve dilution problem - your poll is vague and its result may lead to horrific interpretations.
My answer will be more complex - Vaulting decreased the amount of 4*s actually available, which increased the chance of picking one specific cover, but this came with huge (for me unacceptable) cost - non-vaulted 4*s are de facto unavailable (yeah, basically they are gone, impossible to be farmed, rr upgraded up to point useful in fight and DDQ titan node)
I feel that if I try to lead people in any direction by offering more than "yes" and "no" I'm doing a disservice to the merit of the poll, which is simply "is this working?". That is what the comments section is for.
As usual, in the comments, people are doing whatever they can to spin the issue to fit their opinion. Is anyone ever going to convince a "certain poster" that Vaulting is not good for everyone or even a majority by their comments? Ha! NO!
Vaulting is losing this poll. Point blank.di·lu·tiondīˈlo͞oSHn,diˈlo͞oSH(ə)n/nounthe action of making a liquid more dilute.the action of making something weaker in force, content, or value."he is resisting any dilution of dogma"a liquid that has been diluted.plural noun: dilutions
I don't care that a quote from the MPQ team cherry picked pack dilution as their definition of dilution. That doesn't cover all dilution. Roster strength dilution is also affected by these systems.
There have been plenty of suggestions that offer good alternatives to both pack AND roster dilution. Those have not (yet) been implemented.
So we continue to debate this and hopefully catch the eye or ear of someone in power that says to themselves, "Wait, only making half of our customer base happy is not good. Go team, and find a solution that gets us to 80% or better"!
And that's my stance. I tried the suggested way. Not hoarding, opening tokens as they came, etc... All Vaulting did for me was drain my ISO for a few characters that I covered while at the same time WASTING a bunch of CP for powers I already had 5 in with characters that weren't up to 13 covers. CP are hard to come by, compared to every other resource. I don't particularly like a system that wastes those while not strengthening my roster. I can only level characters up so much until I have to get the needed covers for them. And once they leave the 12, that 15/1/1 is still just a 5/1/1 to probably never be covered.
That is "working as intended?" Well, I hope not!
So let's have a simple poll to show them that people feel it is or it isn't..and if they want to draw more than a simple conclusion, they can read the comments.
In the end, the power lies with MPQ to interpret the results to their choosing. Just like we all interpret this poll and the very definition of dilution to our choosing.
You can all be assured they will make the best decision for them. Hopefully, that decision makes more than 50% of the player base happy as well.2 -
No
Quote for truth and to try and get this conversation back on track with what the problems are, not whose vocabulary and/or ability look up words on dictionary websites are better.Starfury said:
Since half the posts seem to be about semantics:Pylgrim said:
Then you don't understand the term "dilution". Dilution doesn't mean waste or avoiding it. Dilution is having 46 4*s with 1-4 covers and taking years to reach 13 in one or more. Under that light, vaulting DID solve dilution.Beer40 said:It hasn't helped me at all. I was just starting in the 4* transition so I didn't have much waste at all. Now I have enough (plus lack of ISO) that I had to stop pulling and start hoarding.
Dilution isn't a problem and has never been one, no matter how often some people who don't understand the meaning of the word problem repeat it.
People not getting usable 4* within a reasonable timeframe is a problem.
Dilution and the amount of available 4* covers are among the causes of the problem.
People not getting 75% of 4* to a usable level within even an unreasonable timeframe is a new problem. (So is people no longer getting champ levels for vaulted characters.)
Vaulting is the main cause of those two problems.0 -
Yes
For the 50th time, that's an entirely separate issue from dilution.Starfury said:
Indeed. 1/12 is more than 4 times better than 1/50.New McG said:
If you don't understand how a 1/12 chance for a specific character from each pull is FAR better than a 1/50 (soon to be 51!) chance on each pull, I don't know how much an explanation of the math will benefit this discussion.Beer40 said:
Also, for your example, you are not "FAR" more likely to pull the exact cover you need in that 2 week window. You're slightly more likely, and that is completely dependent on:
1) Having enough CP to make enough pulls to get that exact cover. Most people don't make a bunch of CP in 2 weeks. With your higher level roster, you are again completely missing the point that you are in a minority.
2) Getting the exact cover in a completely luck based system.
But 1/50 is far more than 4 times better than 0/38. Maybe that's what people don't like.1 -
Yes
What a bunch of ...mohio said:tl;dr - No one can prove that their roster is negatively effected by the change (cause it probably isn't), they just FEEL like they are due to various psychological complications.
Every single one of my pre March 1 4* champs has been robbed of any chance of significant further growth.
Every vaulted half-covered is stuck there. People would be better off selling their 7th or 8th cover than adding it to a character they'll at best need once a year in ddq crash.
But yeah, the problem is that we feel the wrong way...2 -
No
Who cares, it's a signficant problem that was introduced to fix another problem. Depending on where you are in the roster, the new problem is worse than the old for some. Before the, yeah but overtime dillusion was going to keep getting worse, so is this problem. They didn't fix anything, they just moved the problem from one place to another.New McG said:
For the 50th time, that's an entirely separate issue from dilution.Starfury said:
Indeed. 1/12 is more than 4 times better than 1/50.New McG said:
If you don't understand how a 1/12 chance for a specific character from each pull is FAR better than a 1/50 (soon to be 51!) chance on each pull, I don't know how much an explanation of the math will benefit this discussion.Beer40 said:
Also, for your example, you are not "FAR" more likely to pull the exact cover you need in that 2 week window. You're slightly more likely, and that is completely dependent on:
1) Having enough CP to make enough pulls to get that exact cover. Most people don't make a bunch of CP in 2 weeks. With your higher level roster, you are again completely missing the point that you are in a minority.
2) Getting the exact cover in a completely luck based system.
But 1/50 is far more than 4 times better than 0/38. Maybe that's what people don't like.
The fact of the matter is that IF dillusion is the main problem to fix, the ONLY way to fix it is to PERMANENTLY remove characters from the game (and/or stop adding new ones). But that's a pill they know as well as we do would lead to massive rage quits. So they tried to make a fix that masks the problem and placates the vets and whales more than newer and F2P players.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 44.6K Marvel Puzzle Quest
- 1.5K MPQ News and Announcements
- 20.2K MPQ General Discussion
- 3K MPQ Tips and Guides
- 2K MPQ Character Discussion
- 171 MPQ Supports Discussion
- 2.5K MPQ Events, Tournaments, and Missions
- 2.8K MPQ Alliances
- 6.3K MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
- 6.2K MPQ Bugs and Technical Issues
- 13.5K Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest
- 498 MtGPQ News & Announcements
- 5.3K MtGPQ General Discussion
- 98 MtGPQ Tips & Guides
- 419 MtGPQ Deck Strategy & Planeswalker Discussion
- 295 MtGPQ Events
- 60 MtGPQ Coalitions
- 1.2K MtGPQ Suggestions & Feedback
- 5.6K MtGPQ Bugs & Technical Issues
- 548 Other 505 Go Inc. Games
- 21 Puzzle Quest: The Legend Returns
- 5 Adventure Gnome
- 6 Word Designer: Country Home
- 381 Other Games
- 142 General Discussion
- 239 Off Topic
- 7 505 Go Inc. Forum Rules
- 7 Forum Rules and Site Announcements